Reading:
- Shana Goldin-Perschbacher (2007) “’Not with You But of You’: ‘Unbearable Intimacy’ and Jeff Buckley’s Transgendered Vocality,” from Oh Boy! Masculinities and Popular Music
Listening:
- Jeff Buckley: “Mojo Pin,” “Hallelujah,” “The Way Young Lovers Do”
Posting:
- One of the songs on Blackboard
9 comments:
Question:
The author suggests that Buckley's male listeners are inspired by his fearlessness in engaging a full emotional range (227). Do men really listen to music that is less "emotional" than the music women listen to? Or is it just that different emotions become the focus?
Discussion:
I'm not sure I completely understand what Goldin-Perschbacher means by a "transgender voice." At one point, she says, "singing seems to have made [Buckley] feel as though he is moving in an assertive, manly way. He feels powerful...But the only way to feel this power is also to give up control, to be 'consumed by the moment'...which makes him feel vulnerable, feminine, and organismically joyful." (225) Because I've always associated masculinity with seeking pleasure in the moment, I'm having a hard time buying into this distinction. Eventually, the author explains that by "losing control," she means accessing emotions that seem outside the bounds of masculinity (226). So, I guess she meant seeking pleasure in the moment by freely expressing one's emotions as they occur? I agree that this is ultra-feminine.
Buckley really does have an incredibly reverent and somber tone in "Hallelujah". Goldin-Perschbacher had said, "one gets the sense of an intimate relationship fans have with this music...the intimacy propels the listener into his deepest nature" (220). This song is so beautiful; it really does elevate all of your emotions. Just like the article said, there are moments when he seems to just barely lose control of his voice or go off key.
Now that I've read the article, the voice seems feminine to me, but I honestly don't think I would have made that distinction if I hadn't read the article. I've heard this song so many times before that it doesn't seem unusual to me that it's sung by a male.
Discussion Question:
Although I agree with much of what Goldin-Perschbacher says about Buckley’s ability to be vocally feminine, is he more transgressive than other radical male artists? In particular, would he be considered at the same level of sexual and vocal transgression as Michael Jackson and Elvis Presley?
Artifact Discussion:
After listening to the three Jeff Buckley songs posted on Blackboard, I agreed with the point that Buckley’s voice was capable of spanning female vocal ranges and sounds. He was certainly “not limited by white middle-class heterosexual American standards” that would restrain his music and consequently also his character (Goldin-Perschbacher 215). Nevertheless, the three songs for this posting exhibited different degrees of femininity and transgression.
To me, “The Way Young Lovers Do” was the most feminine song out of the three: the vocalizations at the start of the song were relatively high-pitched, fluid, and soft-sounding. Also, the variations in tone and pitch throughout the song showed “Buckley’s effeminizing tendency to lose control” (Goldin-Perschbacher 226), especially the high-pitched progressions and rough screaming during the seventh minute of the song.
The song “Mojo Pin” comes in second in the ranking of musical femininity. There are many high-pitched, gentle vocalizations reminiscent of female vocals, but it is separated by passages of deeper, male singing. I would say that the start of the song is the most feminine part, for Buckley vocalizes and almost whispers for over a minute. This soft singing is not aggressive; aggression is a dominant characteristic of masculine music, for it reflects the strength of the male in contrast to the gentleness of the female.
Last but not least, “Hallelujah” is the least feminine, most notably since Buckley primarily sings it with a deeper, more male voice than the previous two songs. Although his voice is still soft and quiet at times, the deepness of the voice that he uses, in addition to the moments of vocal crescendo in the song, give it a more heterosexual masculinity that can make it “sexy” to women. The depth and occasional loudness of Buckley’s voice make it seem manly, like how we discussed in class about how softness can be manly if it sounds like the singer is performing privately to his lover.
Question: I find that Jeff Buckley is the most transgressive artist we have studied thus far. I feel it is the blend of talent, range, and tenderness he has that makes him the most transgressive. However, we have used physical appearance (i.e. Rolling Stones costumes) or physical motions (i.e. Elvis’s dancing) as criteria for judging trangressivity. What does Buckley possess that makes him transgressive or is it just a certain je ne sais quoi about him?
Artifact discussion:
I had not listened to anything by Jeff Buckley until listening to the recordings for class. I chose to listen to “Hallelujah” both live and in the studio because I had other covers of the song. I started out with the studio version and immediately noticed something pure about his voice. It really was a beautiful voice to listen to. I was not sure if it was Buckley or another musician playing the guitar, but I feel the ethereal and almost carefree nature of the guitar attributed to this feeling. The minor dips and major modulations also made the song very appealing and heartfelt. I think the thing that spoke to me the most about Buckley’s recordings were not necessarily the lyrics or the musical nature of the song, but rather the way the song made me feel. It was a great feeling to have an especially talented musician sing with what sounds like legitimate emotion and sensitivity. Though society may deem acts of sensitivity and femininity, I think that is the whole basis of music. – to evoke and describe emotion through music. It is a difficult thing to do nowadays with the multitude of artists coming out and the notion that “anybody can be an artist.” In reality, not everybody can be as talented to truly live up to this definition of music like Buckley did.
Moreover, I was struck that the studio version and live version both maintained the vocal talent and purity that I had seen in the studio version. It is uncommon today to find an artist that sounds the same live as they do in recordings, mainly because they use vocal fine-tuning and other technology to enhance their sound in a recording and lack that technology on stage.
Question:
What do you think plays a larger role in the fans’ acceptance of the fact that Buckley sometimes unintentionally slips out of key: the feelings of intimacy or the risk-tasking/losing of his ego?
Artifact Discussion:
In the song “The Way Young Lovers Do,” Shana Goldin-Perschbacher’s point that “Jeff Buckley provocatively challenged the norms of 1990s white boy rock” became very clear to me. In the song, Buckley demonstrated his extremely wide vocal range. He covered several octaves, diving down into the lower tenor range, up into a chest alto voice, up to falsetto, and also a head voice in the falsetto range. By the use of his vocal range in and of itself, it almost seems as though Buckley possesses traits of both genders.
Throughout “The Way Young Lovers Do,” Buckley dips down to syllables that he cannot sustain or control. It sounds as though he is mumbling, almost as though he is not making any embouchure whatsoever with his mouth. He instead just lets the sound come out as mumbled nonsensical syllables. Buckley also ascends to high notes that sometimes sound strained. These exhausting moments, as well as the moments of repeated words and musical chords, seem nearly orgasmic. A particular instant of this is around the time 6:48. Buckley says, “va-va-ville, va-va-ville, ville ville ville,…” The repetitive words and the repetitive chords create the impression that Buckley is working hard to produce the music, and that he is losing control of his inhibitions. The music sounds very joyful and seems to consume Buckley in the moment.
At other points in the song, however, Buckley’s high-pitched feminine voice sounds sweet and smooth. His honey-sounding voice is able to reach notes that many female singers cannot reach. He sustains his vibrato throughout these difficult notes. This ability lends credibility to him as a performing artist.
Artifact Discussion:
From the time his voice comes on I am shocked with how soft spoken it is as he says, “it’s a song about a dream.” That in itself tells the story of his connecting ability with audiences; he obviously does not have a problem talking about what is personal in a public space. Dreams are very intimate; they happen while alone in one’s conscious; not many people can get in on someone’s dreams, and when people do dream, they don’t go around telling everyone what happened in their secret place. But Buckley does. He invites everyone in to share what he is experiencing, and through a combination of his skill and his execution of emotion, they journey with him there—wherever it is that he is going. The use of a singular instrument, the guitar, also adds to the intimacy/ vulnerability of the music. It is in sync with him and gives him respect and grace and the two seem to work together well. The absence of drums or piano enhances the ability to focus and connect with the soloist between silences. Then he groans in high tones using different vowel sounds; you can hear the emotional struggle that sounds like singing through clenched teeth.
He has a lot of control or skill with containing and pushing his voice to convey the emotions he wants. He oscillates between loud and soft embodying many different types of voices, some operatic, some screams, rock, some reminiscent of ballads, vibrato, some straight notes, some whining. He often moans and slurs between his notes as well. The music reaches a sort of climax with the guitar transition.
The lyrics, (“Keep me whole”, “I’m blind and tortured”) revealed some one in pain, tortured perhaps by infatuation, someone who is broken because their love left them looking for meaning again when that’s all he’s been searching/waiting for; There is an emptiness in his life, reflected in the music (or lack); He seems desperate, even subordinate with spontaneous outbursts of assertiveness or screams.
Discussion question(s):
Seeing as how critics acknowledge the amount of vulnerability in his songs, I wonder how that might have impacted his appeal to audiences through his intimacy differently from a singer like Valle?
How much does reception of an artist have to do with the context of the times they are in? What aspects of Buckley’s songs are so appealing/ captivating? Is it his portrayal of masculinity through a profound ability to maintain control? Is it the fact that he is in touch with a vulnerable often described as feminine side? Does he have something for everyone? Is it that his music allows people to transgress their own boundaries, if merely for that instant? And would listeners admit to being attracted/ intimate with the artist as the article suggests, his music, or both? Was his performance always freeing or ever confusing? How did he reconcile these outcomes through his image?
How does Buckley vocally create an intimate bond with his listeners?
I have been a fan of Jeff Buckley for a while, but some of his music makes me feel slightly uncomfortable. I'd never really thought about why this is so prior to reading Goldin-Perschbacher's article. I agree with her that Buckley transcends musical gender norms and crosses over into a female vocal range and style. I believe his music is so personal that it often becomes too close for comfort. Buckley makes simple songs like “Hallelujah” haunting anthems with his piercing high notes and infusion of intense emotion.
I am not used to listening to men croon and cry over lost loves, nor do I usually listen to such sexually explicit lyrics within the soft rock genre (ex: “Mojo Pin Chocolate Version”). I think these very qualities at once attract and repel me from Buckley's music. His high, wavering, emotional notes are simultaneously appealing as he presents himself as a sensitive, heterosexual male and appalling as he exhibits feminine musical qualities in the midst of such blatant heterosexuality. In this way, I see Buckley as a rocker much like Mick Jagger who toyed with gender to appeal to both men and women.
I also agree with Golding-Perschbacher that Buckley creates a bond with his listeners by making them feel like he is sharing very private moments with them in his lyrics. Buckley creates such an intimate mood that it only feels appropriate to listen to his music alone, and his untimely death makes his intimate lyrics feel sacred.
Question:
Goldin-Perschbacher claims that Jeff Buckley was heterosexual and would not joke about his songs having a homosexual appeal to them. Rather, she says that his choice of songs "aided his exploration of the boundaries of his musical and gender identities" (217). However, I think that we must take into consideration how unpopular it was to be out of the closet at that time. Due to these social constraints, do you think that Buckley used his vocal transgressions as a homosexual outlet in a world that suppressed his sexual expression otherwise?
Artifact Discussion:
After listening to the song “Mojo Pin” by Jeff Buckley, I would definitely say that he is the greatest transgressor that we have studied so far. Considering the era that he was in, Buckley crosses gender boundaries that must have received an enormous amount of criticism and condemnation. Clearly, Rudy Vallee was also socially criticized for his high pitched crooning. However, Buckley takes this a step further to actually imitate feminine voices and sing women’s cover songs, as Goldin-Perschbacher points out. Also unlike Vallee, Jeff Buckley was known to be a very talented singer, being able to hit wide ranges of vocal tones. However, he focuses more on the high pitches in order to “explore his boundaries.”
At the beginning of “Mojo Pin,” Buckley hums and sings in a high, feminine voice for about a minute. This seems to relate to Goldin-Perschbacher’s idea that music is a way of expressing sex. If Buckley truly were using his music to express or explore his homosexuality in question, than this would make sense. The first minute or so of “Mojo Pin” seems that Buckley is solely testing the vocal ranges of femininity. This argument is strengthened by the fact that the sounds are not accompanied by lyrics. It is purely a natural “experience that re-teaches [him] how to relate to the world, how to have the nerve to open [himself] to it” (214). Thus, I would argue that Jeff Buckley transcended gender relations of music in order to express his sexuality.
Question: Simon Frith argues that "we enjoy music because of its use in answering questions of identity and further more being able to help us manage the relationship between our public and private emotional lives". Aside from these reasons are they any other reasons that men would listen to a transgendered, vulnerable artist like Buckley? I find his music to be some what enjoyable (the sound of "the way young lovers do")so is there any other situation that would make men listen to an artist like Buckley besides their feeling of being vulnerable?
Discussion: Jeff Buckley's voice in the three song we listened to does make him seem vulnerable. In all three of the songs, especially Hallelujah, Buckley voice gives of this sense of confidence like is living what he's singing about. I think this establishes a stronger connection between him and the audience. I could really find any sense of him being transgendered. I mean his voice is slightly feminine but i think when your singing about some of the things Buckley is singing about his voice has to seem a little feminine. Aside from him being able to sing from a position that makes him vulnerable I'm not sure how he could be considered transgendered. Is it because it seem easy for him to sing from this position while other most male artist tend to stay away making music that makes them seem both vulnerable and feminine?
The article talks about him being able to "turn a straight man gay", I dont know if I agree with that statement. I think that his music appeals to the male listeners that are comfortable expressing the emotional side and comfortable with having someone like Buckley to listen to in times they are feeling emotional or "vulnerable".
What makes Buckley slightly more acceptable in the eyes of his male audience than other "crooners?" Does his somewhat less mainstream commercially-friendly music/persona have anything to do with it? What about the fact that while he's appealing to women, his music isn't aimed at screaming girls but rather intellectual, more laid-back females?
I've been a pretty big fan of Buckley for a while now, and I actually got into him through an ex-boyfriend. He said he really enjoyed Jeff's use of his voice, and how his melodies were, while interesting, soft enough to put more emphasis on his powerful lyrics (regardless of whether they were originally written by him or not). I can very much agree with that point- we can see that perfectly in each of the tracks we listened to.
Another reason we both really enjoy Buckley is something the article mentions as well: the intimacy of each track. I think something that makes Buckley appealing to people, especially to men, is the idea that these private emotions are being let out quietly and in private. Men are not supposed to yell out their emotions to the world or cry in front of crowded rooms. Thus, being able to release these feelings in what could be considered a safer environment probably draws a lot of listeners to Buckley.
Post a Comment